What's new

Legend Indian Muslim artist doesnt trust India

No, I am not saying he should appologise. But he should not have painted a Hindu goddess in an inappropriate manner. It is not a question of some people disagreeing with him. For an elderly man, and a respected senior citizen, he should have known that there are limits to the so called 'freedom of artistic expressions' of even the most exalted of artists.

Well I guess he doesn't agree with the limits on freedom of expression like others do, and he has every right to believe that. He has the right to paint a hindu goddess any way he wants, he is free to do that. The problem is with bigots who feel that it is everyones duty to respect them.

I dont subscribe to the threats meted out to him. But he should realise that the reaction would not have been different had he portrayed the Prophet or Christ or the Sikh gurus or Lord Buddha or others of similar divine stature in inappropriate manner in any nation in the world.

It is more an issue of insensitivity and inappropriate behaviour on the part of a talented and revered public personality than that of intolerance on the part of an aggreived group. I am not condoning the nefarious activities of the agitating groups and their manner of showing dissent. But MFH should not have done what he did.

Regards

Sure it would have been the same whether he had portray some other religion like this, but he has the freedom to do so. If it offends people, then they shall stay offended instead of becoming violent. In a civilized society people can agree to disagree without becoming violent :D

Good to know that you are not condoning the activities of the violent groups :cheers:
 
.
Actually you do have the right to that freedom of expression. Just because it isn't acceptable in your society, it doesn't mean it is right. Sanity is not based on numbers.

This is the problem when you put religion on a pedastal. Freedom of expression shall not be limited just because some pious people are offended. If people are offended, they can disagree and protest, not start threatening people with death. This is the difference between an open and civilized country, and one that is insecure and restricts people for pleasing religion.

Why should M.F. Hussain apologize? Because some people disagree with him? Next you will say that religion shall not be criticized even if it is the problem (as it is in so many cases).

Since India is a very matured and civilized society he is still alive. If he has done the same kind of offending to any other religion which has origin of other than India he wouldn't have survived .

M.F. Hussain should apologize because he has hurt feeling of millions of Hindus and not because some disagree with him .There is a lot of difference between disagreement and offending . Its not at all acceptable that you say Hinduism has problem , that too because of such a coward like M.F. Hussain.
 
.
Nobody india is asking for M.F. Hussain's head...hindu community is too mature to do that.

yaa,hindus are offended and they protest aganist any exhibition of such paintings.Thats it...no more public exhibitions of his paintings as long as he doesnt realise his mistake and refrain from such attempts in future.whats so unfair or unreasonable about it??

Why is he holding on his huge ego to come in terms with the fact that his vulgar painting of hindu god and goddess hurt the sentiments of miliions of hindus??

We had many great artists before ...both hindu and muslims ,none found any desire to draw nude(vulgar) paints of hindu deties as they had more aesthetic sense than Hussain.

Well apparently he wasn't safe so he had to leave. You think it was a mistake for him to do that, but he might not feel that way. So what to do? Force him to apologize or kill him? Tell me something, why does he HAVE to respect the tender sentiments of people?

This reminds me of some Bollywood movies that were made on Sikhs. I believe there was a controversy with SIK and some other movie, Dil Bole Hadippa, I believe. Again the sentiments of Sikhs were hurt. It seems like you have to do everything with a view of not hurting 'religious sentiments' :lol: So much for freedom of expression.
 
.
No, I am not saying he should appologise. But he should not have painted a Hindu goddess in an inappropriate manner. It is not a question of some people disagreeing with him. For an elderly man, and a respected senior citizen, he should have known that there are limits to the so called 'freedom of artistic expressions' of even the most exalted of artists.

I dont subscribe to the threats meted out to him. But he should realise that the reaction would not have been different had he portrayed the Prophet or Christ or the Sikh gurus or Lord Buddha or others of similar divine stature in inappropriate manner in any nation in the world.

It is more an issue of insensitivity and inappropriate behaviour on the part of a talented and revered public personality than that of intolerance on the part of an aggreived group. I am not condoning the nefarious activities of the agitating groups and their manner of showing dissent. But MFH should not have done what he did.

Regards

You are wrong , he should definitely apologize for what ever he has done. Of course arts has no limits ,but in the name of arts how can some one hurt feeling of millions of people.

If you guys do not know, Sarasvathi is the goddess of all arts in Hinduism.Even before joining the school or before staring any kind of "arts" related stuff as a Hindu everybody should pray this goddess first (Those learning classical music must be aware and would have prayed too , despite their religion ).Being such a great artist offending the Goddess of arts is totally unacceptable .

I definitely do not agree letting him inside our country back.One cannot be measured by age but only by maturity.
 
Last edited:
.
Well I guess he doesn't agree with the limits on freedom of expression like others do, and he has every right to believe that. He has the right to paint a hindu goddess any way he wants, he is free to do that. The problem is with bigots who feel that it is everyones duty to respect them.



Sure it would have been the same whether he had portray some other religion like this, but he has the freedom to do so. If it offends people, then they shall stay offended instead of becoming violent. In a civilized society people can agree to disagree without becoming violent :D

Good to know that you are not condoning the activities of the violent groups :cheers:

I think you have got the wrong meaning of democracy , may be because most of the time you guys were under dictatorship :)

One has the right to express the anything he wants which does not hurt the feelings of others.Just because I have freedom I cannot go to my neighbors home and start scolding him :rofl: .

What you are saying is I can draw a nude picture of any one living in India in the name of arts and keep it for public display :)

He cannot disrespect any God or any Religion like that.He got no rights to do that. In such a case we do have law to put him behind bars.
 
.
We do not allow nudity in any form. Whereas you can see such sculptures in Khajuraho, Konark Sun Temple in India etc

Aren't you just a trifle mixed up here? The entity you call 'WE' has been in existance for all of 62 years whereas the sclulptures you are refering to were built between 950 AD and 1150 AD (about 300 years before Babur was even conceived). So who is the 'YOU' and who is the 'WE' here?

Surprising how we mould and bend history to match our statements!!!!
 
.
I disagree that freedom of speech means I have the right to be offensive. It is different if you want to discuss some aspect of religion, race e.t.c. in an objective manner in an attempt to understand it based on proper research and sources.

But inflammatory stuff with no basis in reality or is completely false should not be allowed. Even the western countries that are suppose to stand for freedom of speech have laws about libel and defamation. You can't even question the holocaust (not that I deny it) in some countries.

Therefore there are some cases particularly where content is highly inflammatory and wrong that freedom of speech has it limits.
 
.
I think you have got the wrong meaning of democracy , may be because most of the time you guys were under dictatorship :)

One has the right to express the anything he wants which does not hurt the feelings of others.Just because I have freedom I cannot go to my neighbors home and start scolding him :rofl: .

What you are saying is I can draw a nude picture of any one living in India in the name of arts and keep it for public display :)

He cannot disrespect any God or any Religion like that.He got no rights to do that. In such a case we do have law to put him behind bars.

Actually since I am living in the US I am well aware of how democracy works and what freedom is :P

Now you are just indulging in analogical fallacies. There is a big difference between going to your neighbors house to scold him and drawing paintings that offend people. Your second analogy is the same. Are we talking about a painter drawing nude pictures of Gods or actual people?
 
.
I'm not a Hindu, but I can tell you what my reaction would be if someone lampooned our prophet.

Hussain is a perverted dirty old man who has obviously not had his share of good wholesome sex in his miserable lifetime.

Many many many artists love painting and celebrating the nude female form ..... nothing new there, and no complaints as long as he paints nudes of his muse, Madhuri Dixit (though I think Dr. Nene would have an issue there now).

But Hussain is an Indian first, then an artist. He has not lived his life in a vacuum. He well knew the enormity of the sacrilege he was commiting, and its effect on Hindus across the country and the world.

He still went ahead and did it.

Trying to couch this under the garb of artistic licence and freedom of expression by neo-liberal pseudo-intellectual jhola carrying kurta-fatti jeans wearing cutting chai sipping intellegentsia of the country is BULLSHIT!!!!

He hurt the sentiments of close to a billion people and he should have the decency of apologising before he is let back to finish his misearable existence in the land that spawned a bigoted moron like him.

Cheers, Doc
 
.
Actually since I am living in the US I am well aware of how democracy works and what freedom is :P

Now you are just indulging in analogical fallacies. There is a big difference between going to your neighbors house to scold him and drawing paintings that offend people. Your second analogy is the same. Are we talking about a painter drawing nude pictures of Gods or actual people?

Why because my culture has taught me God is there everywhere ,inside every person. We do not have any separate rules for Gods :)

Hey even drawing nude picture of my neighbor is so much offending , then think of offending God who represents a religion and which represent a billion people !!!

To make things very clear to you , Being in US you definitely have the right to speech and do you think you can openly speack something supporting Taliban or Osama Bin Laden ?

If you think so try it once buddy !!! May be you live in a country where in offending a religion is acceptable :rofl: but in India law strictly prohibits any sort of such activities .
 
. .
I think India is better off without this old Taliban style painter. Let him emigrate to SWAT or Afghanistan where he can join his stone age type brothers and deface and destroy Buddha statues and paint Hindu deities in the nude etc. We dont need his mental types in India. And Jana should read the words there are no depictions of any nude Hindu deities in any temple before continously blasphemising Hinduism. I am aware that this is a Pakistani forum but forget not that you have Hindus in Pakistan as well. As we are sensitive to the feelings of our Muslim countrymen please be sensitive to the feelings of your Hindu countrymen even if you despise and envy your neighbours across the eastern border
 
.
Well I can see the clear trumpet blown by Pakistanis where they have been saying that the paintings depict Hindu goddesses where as there is no such painting present anywhere in India nor outside.

As far as sex being the part of hindu culture is considered. Sex is something which is the most required and the most taboo thing in south asia. If sex was so wrong god would have not chosen it as the source of recreation and essential for the cycle of the world to churn. Hindu culture has very well adopted sex within itself for the same reason.
 
.
when i said any society ,I was taking about degree of tolerance for disrespect of the religion that society belongs to...not the unmindfulness or even encourgement witnessed for the same in unconcerned societies belonging to other sects.
Yes, I got that. That’s what I meant by ‘one can have it in any way one wishes, just as long as one stays away from my sentiments’.
An Wrong assumption.

I'm sure Rushdies, and Nasrins and Theo van Gogs are celebrated not because they committed blasphemy,but for the quality of thier creativity.
Rushdi’s The Satanic Verses is not noted for his literary work, and is certainly not in the same category as Midnight’s Children. Nasrin’s writings are nowhere close to being literature – far from it. I haven’t watched van Gog’s films, but I hear he was good. People rallied behind them, not because of the ‘quality of their creativity’, but, as you have correctly noted, because they were, and continues to be, victims of religious fanaticism. The same fanaticism of which Hussain is a victim.
BTW,Satanic verse was banned in india
And it is equally condemnable.
we only sympathize with Writers like Rushdies, and Nasrins when they get Fatwas on their head rather than condone their seemingly anti islamic opinion, though both Rushdies, and Nasrins have tried to explain their position on numerous occasions.
How different is Hussain’s situation from the one hit by a fatwa. He fears for his life in his home country, his art faces the threat of being vandalized, even anybody sponsoring his art faces the threat from these religious fanatics. Why is it then so hard to sympathize with him? Is it because that his fatwa like situation is because he, unlike the others, has hit our sensibilities reared by our religion?

In any case, not ‘condoning’ Hussain for upsetting one’s sensibility doesn’t mean that one has to hound him down and drive him away from his home.
And why should other people tolerate ur rudeness if u insult their religion in the name of freedom of expression.
No, they don’t have to. That’s the beauty of freedom. The same way as I am not bound to give sh*t to your religious irrationalities, you are also not bound to give sh*t to what I think of your religiosity. But that doesn’t mean that one gets to threaten bodily harm, simply because one doesn't agree with someone. There is a thin red line between protesting and stifling one’s right by threats. The former is not the issue. The later is.
Anyway,Rushdies would not have found a very safe refuge in UK,had he wrote erotic story involving Jesus and his family memebers...
Strawman.
MH Hussain's case is one such rude attempt...i may give him benefit of doubt due to the his ignorance of hindu religion.But he should've come clean on this on his own.An public apology would've been enough to put an end this controversy.Instead he willfully choose to remain insolent disregarding the sentiments of hindus who make majority religious group in his native land.
I am willing to assume that the part highlighted was one of those momentary lapse of reason. What you are essentially saying is that sentiments of the majority must always be given precedence and/or catered to, by the minority. The flip side is, the majority do not have to care for the sentiments of the minority.

I am personally glad that Hussain didn't apologize to compromise with these wingnuts.
As long as MH Hussain doesnt care much for hindu sentiments ...I dont think he or his art would find a secure place in india which is unfortunate as this controversy aside he is a great artist.
How is that sentiment different from the religious fanaticism of the fatwas against Rushdies and Nasrins and van Gogs etc. that apparently makes you sympathize with these men. Instead of condemning that sentiment, you seem to rallying behind it all the while sugercoating it by calling it 'unfortunate'.
Anyway he probably more happy to stay in Dubai and draw more such stupid painting of hindu godess rather than realise his mistake.
In my book, he didn't make any mistake to realise.
 
.
Well apparently he wasn't safe so he had to leave. You think it was a mistake for him to do that, but he might not feel that way. So what to do? Force him to apologize or kill him? Tell me something, why does he HAVE to respect the tender sentiments of people?

This reminds me of some Bollywood movies that were made on Sikhs. I believe there was a controversy with SIK and some other movie, Dil Bole Hadippa, I believe. Again the sentiments of Sikhs were hurt. It seems like you have to do everything with a view of not hurting 'religious sentiments' :lol: So much for freedom of expression.



do you feel the same way about the dutch guy who drew cartoon of the prophet ???????????? guess there were loads of people busy with offering a reward for his beheading?????

do you think that there should be no limit to freedom of expression....so that would mean that you have no problems for all the anti -pakistani stuff to be posted on this forum??????? then please
recomend the moderators to stop moderating>>>>>
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom